Prevalence-Induced Concept Change: Understanding Our Misjudgment of Progress
Why do some problems seem to defy our ability to solve them? Are they genuinely unsolvable, or is their complexity simply beyond our comprehension? Do we lack the necessary resources — human, material, or otherwise? Or perhaps the issue lies not in our problem-solving abilities but in our capacity to recognize and acknowledge the progress we achieve?
Lately, I’ve been struck by a disconnect between the pervasive pessimism around me and my own experiences. Friends and acquaintances often complain of worsening conditions, yet I see undeniable signs of progress. From renewed innovation in space exploration to advances in artificial intelligence and breakthroughs in healthcare, my observations starkly contradict the gloomy narratives I constantly encounter. This glaring disparity has led me to question why there is such a large gap between what people say and what I perceive.
I understand that much of my perspective is influenced by my circumstances — call it luck, blessings, or even privilege. I recognize its existence. However, that alone cannot fully explain the gap between the pessimism I hear and the progress I see.
To better understand this noise-to-signal mismatch, I’ve examined various psychological phenomena. To my surprise, I discovered a concept that sheds light on this troubling disconnect: prevalence-induced concept change in human judgment.
In 2018, American psychologist and writer Daniel Gilbert and his team identified the concept. According to their research, when a problem becomes less prevalent, we redefine it. In other words, as a problem diminishes, we expand its definition, leading to progress being discounted or even denied altogether.
Gilbert explained the phenomena:
“When problems become rare, we count more things as problems. Our studies suggest that when the world gets better, we become harsher critics of it, and this can cause us to mistakenly conclude that it hasn’t gotten better at all. Progress, it seems, tends to mask itself.”
This cognitive bias, a variation of confirmation bias, isn’t limited to large, seemingly intractable social issues. Gilbert and his team demonstrated this phenomenon through a series of simple experiments.
“We had volunteers look at thousands of dots on a computer screen one at a time and decide if each was or was not blue,” Gilbert said. “We lowered the prevalence of blue dots, and what we found was that our participants began to classify as blue dots they had previously classified as purple.”
The Two-Way Street of Neurological Processes: Inputs and Outputs
We often consider our brains to be the ultimate arbiters of truth, processing sensory information and delivering objective judgments. However, this view is incomplete. Our inputs significantly impact our outputs. This process is a two-way street, with heavy traffic flowing in both directions.
We are often unaware of how profoundly our thoughts and behaviors are shaped by the information we consume. Even if we believe we have a world-class filter, our subconscious constantly absorbs information in ways we don’t fully understand. Constant exposure to negative news and being surrounded by pessimists can cloud our judgment and distort our perception of progress.
By recognizing that our perceptions are influenced by the information we encounter, we can better understand the disconnect between observed progress and perceived decline. Acknowledging this two-way street of neurological processes helps us appreciate the complexity of human judgment and encourages us to cultivate a more balanced and informed perspective.
Differing Worldviews: The Battle of Problem Perception
The concept also explains why individuals with similar backgrounds can hold firmly opposing beliefs. Consider someone who is intensely passionate about a particular cause. Even if the desired change is achieved, they are unlikely to move on to a new cause. Over time, their identity becomes intertwined with the issue they advocate for, and they unconsciously expand their definition of the original problem. In other words, they start counting purple dots as blue ones.
“Expanding one’s definition of a problem may be seen by some as evidence of political correctness run amok,” Gilbert said. “They will argue that reducing the prevalence of discrimination, for example, will simply cause us to start calling more behaviors discriminatory. Others will see the expansion of concepts as an increase in social sensitivity, as we become aware of problems that we previously failed to recognize.”
Gilbert’s team wisely refrained from taking sides, as they should have. However, to reduce conflict in modern life, we must avoid constantly moving the goalposts.
Misallocation of Resources and Policy Decisions
In materials science, the term “creep” describes the deformation of a solid under pressure. However, it is increasingly used to describe the gradual expansion of an original boundary.
In the military, we used “mission creep” to refer to expanding objectives beyond what was initially intended. This can happen for various reasons, such as changing circumstances or political pressure. Mission creep often results in unnecessary casualties, financial costs, and a loss of focus and effectiveness. In project management, “scope creep” refers to the growth of a project’s scope beyond the original agreement, causing delays, cost overruns, and diminished quality.
Similarly, prevalence-induced concept change leads to creep in resource allocation. Policymakers sometimes unintentionally expand the definition of a problem when its actual prevalence has decreased, resulting in policies misaligned with the current state of affairs. Failing to accurately assess current problems can lead to unnecessary and expensive solutions for issues that are no longer major concerns. Additionally, it may cause important emerging issues to be overlooked and unaddressed.
Maybe I’m not Crazy
Thanks to Daniel Gilbert, I’m starting to think I’m not losing my mind. Maybe the situation isn’t as dire as it seems. It’s plausible that some of the issues consuming society’s focus are improving, just not at the same pace as expectations are evolving. Perhaps the blue dots are disappearing, and now we’re simply calling purple dots blue ones.
Unfortunately, simply being aware of biases like prevalence-induced concept change doesn’t prevent them from occurring. Even when Gilbert’s study participants were warned about the effect and offered financial incentives to resist, the bias persisted. But by recognizing these biases, we can start to see the world as it truly is: a place of continuous progress and boundless potential. Let’s celebrate our advancements, from eradicating diseases to breaking technological barriers, and embrace the bright future ahead. The world is improving, and it’s time we acknowledge and cherish that progress.
